Topic: [SDC] ShadowCash | Welcome to the UMBRA - page 397. (Read 1289714 times)

bump

I like the name Shadow. Not as keen on the "Cash" part, altho it explains the usage. I guess if I heard a better name I could be swayed. Really cant imagine what that could be tho. hard to vote yes before hearing something better.

EDIT: Since this coin has encrypted messaging and will have an in wallet store/market, voice and file uploads and who knows what else in the future, we are less a coin and more a network. The "cash" is only one part.

If we rename to "Shadow" we express the broader scope of this coin/network.

(Kinda like when "Apple Computer" changed its name simply to "Apple")

so… shadowcash, shadowsend, shadowchat, shdowbay, shadowvoice etc etc all fall under the purview of Shadow, an elegant and simple to market brand.

The cryptography is hashing algorithms used by many other coins and applications. It's not weak.

if what you mean is the privacy of the zk outputs, sure, but isn't that already available to everyone? Everyone can see the blockchain, everyone can generate a Shadow output with the wallet. Do you see your output on the blockchain? Auditing the code itself is something different, a good auditor is going to be looking for things that can be construed as malware, things that can cause the coin to break, things that are not actually doing what they claim to be doing from the perspective of a user.

By the way, when you say things like there's inside information of an audit fail, you are disparaging the auditor more than the coin. If Zeuner couldn't be trusted to not do things like leak inside information, he would have no value and no respect as an auditor. That's why it came across as a bit of a dick move.

On the subject of the name, I started a poll to try to gauge people's opinions on it. I think the current name might harm adoption in the long-term.

Given the amount of work involved in rebranding etc. this is probably the last time that the option of renaming the project can be entertained at all.
There would have to be a pretty sizeable majority for renaming (plus someone would have to come up with a better name) for it to be considered, but either way it's maybe the last chance we'll have to have the discussion, so speak your brains.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=931139.new#new

Why not (\/) (',,,,') (\/)!

Thanks everyone who donated to the review! We'll post the results on shadowtalk as soon as as they come in.

If we missed any credit to donators, please post a reply on the sdtalk thread for the review, the amount donated and we'll add you up there.


Lol.. Why FUD the project Wheat? Maybe I'm missing the humor in your post, either way it's senseless.

I don't like it either. I don't know how attached everyone else is to it, but to me it sounds like the currency from some shit RPG. Probably won't help with getting wider adoption. The DarkCoin community started talking about changing the name recently, but it would be a lot harder for them now. Might be worth discussing before we're past the point of no return.

Is there a date set for the audit?

As I said above:



IF the code passes the review then I feel we have the best anon solution on the market today. IF the "cryptography is found to be weak" then I don't think enthusiasm/hype pre-review would add much more negatively to the price crash which would almost certainly ensue. What are we trading at? Like 5 cents a coin? I think its quite ok if people engage in hopeful/bullish speculation particularly since BTC has been such a heartbreaker lately.

Taking a leap of faith can be a wonderful thing, and sometimes you don't have a choice in the matter.

Thank you for your thoughtful words about privacy and your reasons for supporting this coin.
It seems you might be human after all.

 

You don't have to understand the cryptography, that's beyond the realm of most human beings. But all of the commands and the functions of the wallet client are fairly simple to understand. That's sufficient enough.

I support this coin because I believe it is progress towards a world where the average human can enjoy privacy with their online communications. Although I despise the name, what the coin has already accomplished is awesome. The wallet is fun for me to open and play with.

I don't want the project to die if the cryptography is found to be weak.  This will happen if it's hyped prematurely and touted as the "anon solution" before having any solid peer reviews. I personally think it should have been open sourced to a closed group of individuals that were qualified to peer review if interested. Hype can completely destroy a coin.

I continue to educate myself about its inner workings. How much knowledge must one possess before you'll be satisfied they can support this coin without "blind faith"? Since I don't have a computer science degree I will have to wait on Zeuner. But then perhaps I should get my own crypto degree to check Zeuner's work? After all I shouldn't have to rely on trust, right?

Let me ask you a question. Why do you support this coin?

Bottom line: your support of a coin for it's implementation of a trustless anon protocol without understanding it's inner workings is putting 100% trust in people you do not know.

I'm afraid you failing to taking into account that ryno was referring to ZK-Snarks lack of ability to be setup in a trustless manner, not NIZKP (Non-Interactive Zero Knowledge Proofs) which is in use in ShadowSend v2 and is trustless.

Since that post by ryno the guys working on ZK-Snarks figured out a trustless setup which is promising if SDC decide to take this route in the future. Info here: https://twitter.com/SDLerner/status/548205708236566530

Just to clarify for you.


A zero knowledge solution has been found, it is being assessed by a qualified auditor. Lets await the results.

LOL.

No. I'm referring to ShadowCash's unique ZK anon implementation (which makes use of ring sig as well as other tech) as explained in this whitepaper. The code is currently being reviewed by Isidor Zeuner.

ShadowCash: Zero­knowledge Anonymous Distributed E­Cash
via Traceable Ring Signatures
 http://shadow.cash/downloads/shadowcash-anon.pdf

Were you referring to CryptoNote ring sigs then? 

I wasn't referring to zk-snarks.

I believe search and implementation is still ongoing:

So rather than apologise for causing confusion and annoyance with your irresponsible FUD post you choose to slam some other members of this coin for "hyping"?

I know you feel that way about my posts so let me explain myself:

1) I'm incredibly excited by this tech. Is it "blind faith" to follow a coin without understanding every line of code or holding a doctorate in computer science?
2) I have tried to create excitement and buzz by expressing my enthusiasm for this project to others. this is what humans do. if that is "hype" then Im guilty.
3) I have tried to understand this tech and help others do so despite my technical limitations. I want to learn more. When I get something wrong I correct it and apologise for any confusion caused.
4) I believe in the abilities and integrity of Ryno and the Team after seeing how they operate for 2 months now

I will not permit your feelings to affect my own expression or curb my enthusiasm for Shadow (no self-censorship). But I will consider them.

Communities need members like you to temper passions.
But conversely communities also need passionate members.
We should all play to our strengths and work together.



p.s. If the Zeuner Report comes out good it's you and me Cage Match style  
p.p.s do you suppose we could hype up the report by calling it the Z-files? LOL. JK.

Stop trashing the coin with no proof or details.  Its expected for the audit to point out areas of improvements, this is hardly a "fail".  Your ominous warnings with no proof of anything, is highly irresponsible.

Lol i fully support this coin and the dev team. I even donated .5 btc to the audit fund. Some of you community members with blind faith in a protocol that you dont understand perturb me.

Stop fucking hyping the coin. It will bite you in the ass so hard if something is proved wrong with all this hype and hope around.

 It will be great for some of us with btc in cold storage, but it can also completely suck the life out of a coin.

Isidor Zeuner is a German cryptographer and also a prominent member of the bitcoin developer mailing list. There are not that many people active on the developer mailing list, but he is one of them.  You can read some of his stuff here: https://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/

We have raised over 5 btc for him to help audit ShadowCash.  Info here: http://shadowtalk.org/topic/321/shadowcash-whitepaper-review-and-code-audit

Also as a note, if the audit turns up any flaws or problems with the Shadow system, then its a good thing, and the developers can work to plug holes, and improve the system.  Its probably likely that there can be some improvements, but this is hardly a "fail".  When Kristov Atlas audited the DRK codebase, he found some flaws in their coinjoin scheme, which they improved upon.  This is all part of becoming a hardened coin.